NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD Vs. RAHUL VERMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for the insurer appellant. The insurer appellant feels aggrieved by the award of an amount of Rs. 8,56,511 as compensation to the claimants on account of the injuries sustained by the claimants in an accident involving the offending motor vehicle, a jeep No. UP 76-A 8607 insured with the present appellant.

(2.) It is said that on 31.8.2000 at about 10 a.m. claimants Rahul Verma and Anuj Kumar Saxena had gone on a motor cycle No. UP 76-A 9218 when they met with the accident near Durga Temple in Civil Lines Police Station, Fatehgarh, District Farrukhabad, on account of which they sustained injuries. Claimant-respondent No. 1 Rahul Verma received grievous injuries and his left leg was fractured. Respondent No. 2 Anuj Kumar Saxena received simple injuries. The respondent Nos. 1 and 2 are aged about 21 and 25 years respectively. The respondent No. 1 used to help his mother who is a Government contractor. Out of the earning she used to give Rs. 5,000 to her son Rahul Verma per month.

(3.) The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the Tribunal has awarded excessive compensation, because it has taken disability as 80 per cent for the injuries sustained as mentioned in the medical certificate. According to the statutory provision as per entry at serial No. 19 of Schedule I, part II of Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 the permanent disability is only 60 per cent for assessing the compensation. This Schedule does not state that the disability cannot exceed more than 60 per cent. There is a medical certificate showing that his left leg from thigh has to be amputated due to which the claimant No. 1 Rahul Verma cannot perform even his daily chores. We do not find any substance in this submission that permanent disability cannot exceed 60 per cent as provided in Schedule I, part II of the Workmen's Compensation Act.